I've noticed this effect with Top100 movies and their discussion topics. In many cases, until someone says they actually dislike the movie, the discussion can't begin!

Somehow, it seems like it's much easier to have a discussion about how much we agree when we're face-to-face. Not that there isn't a real temptation to be negative all the time, but my experience is that the temptation to criticize/nitpick/get personal is greatly amplified for online communities like ours...

It's about time for Wells to choose his annual movie to "take out" in the awards hunt -- the one that he can't stand, and lobbies against with fervor. I'm still upset that his crusade against Munich appeared to work. Maybe his attacks had nothing to do with the film's lack of awards traction -- it was nominated if memory serves, but didn't win anything -- but I can't shake the feeling that it probably did.

His generally positive words about The King's Speech have begun to morph into sour grapes about the accolades it has received, so he's getting there. And he has nothing but contempt for anyone who suggests Toy Story 3 as a Best Picture nominee.

And he's been a bigger Social Network supporter than a Fighter supporter, IIRC.

undeveloped beardssandalsfat people (which he defines very, very loosely)ChristiansRepublicansetc.etc.etc.

This post reveals the ironic difficulty of how hard it is to talk about this issue. I mean: If Jeffrey Wells (whom I have never read aside from clicking links on A&F) says "People with scraggly beards are fatheads", how do we avoid lowering ourselves to his level, which will obviously just encourage him? My first thought: Isn't just ignoring him the best idea?

It becomes even more pertinent if we substitute in "Ted Baehr" and "Neo-marxist radical ideologues are ruining our children".